The Rising Cost of Mature Scotch

Oh my goodness, it's been too long! Too long since I posted, too long since I drank a dram of scotch.

But, here I am, forging ahead. Through tired eyes and a slogged brain, I mush! (only slightly over dramatic).

Today I address an issue that has troubled me for some time and will continue into the future.

I frequent my favorite booze shop Total Wine. I find they have superior selection for significantly cheaper prices. Where BevMo had Macallan 12 for $40, Total Wine had it for $30. Where JW Blue Label was $210 at Albertson's, it was $180 at Total Wine. For those of you who have not shopped for booze with me, let me tell you: it's a time consuming process. Much like the stereotypical woman shopping for a purse/pair of shoes/handbag, I browse. I read. I look. I compare. I search. I think.

Then I walk away.

Then I come back.

I always shop with a friend so we can discuss, because it's not just a purchase of mine, it's a purchase of all. The liquid will be shared amongst us all. Usually, a good 45 minutes to an hour passes before I buy. I do my research, I take my time, and only once have I ever regretted a purchase (and that's the only time I took the advice of the store employee).

Suffice to say, I remember things about my scotch. Like prices.

Prices are on the rise. Macallan 12 is now $42.99 at Total Wine. Everything keeps...getting...more...expensive. It makes it harder to justify a purchase. Where I would reward myself every few months with a $100 bottle, now for the same scotch it's more like $120. Soon I'll be buying "mid" tier scotches for $80!

What's the deal?!

Well, I have read several articles and noticed some things myself that corroborate the articles.

Firstly, the articles. That articles talks about a rising middle class in Asia and South America thirsty for whisky. Supplies are dwindling.  Classic Supply and Demand. The Supply is low and Demand is high = higher prices. The problem with scotch whisky is that it takes time to make more supply. The lowest standard single malt is 10 years. That means if demand is high today, the supply cannot grow until 10 years later. Scotch is a long-term investment. Distilleries must guess what the demand will be in the future. How were they to know an exploding middle class in Asia would enjoy scotch whisky?

Another reason I have noticed myself is the "cool" factor. And...I'm going to say it...fucking hipsters. Scotch has a certain sense of class about it, or an old-fashioned quality; grandfatherly quality. Hipsters being all "I was doing/drinking/eating that/this before it was cool," definitely honed in on whisky. First it started with obscure cocktails, then old fashioned cocktails. Manhattans and whatnot. Those are made with whiskey: bourbon, wheat, or rye.

Currently, Bourbon is the drink of choice for many in the "drink snobbery" crowd (but don't take it too seriously, bro). Yes, I'm being judgmental and generalizing, but IT'S MY BLOG SO EAT IT. But really, whiskey bars specializing in various whiskies have been opening up. There's one that opened up nearby me. The logo is an old fashioned bicycle

Hipster if I've ever smelled one. One outside patio has a DJ and loud music, the inside is bar-cramped with loud music, the downstairs is restaurant style seating with loud music...but there's a tiny cigar patio that is less crowded with (usually) quieter music. And (it pains me to say this), but their selection is good. Best selection at a bar within reasonable driving distance. 

Rising Middle Class and Dirty fuckin' Hipsters have increased demands. (HOW DARE YOU SUGGEST THAT I AM AM HIPSTER. I WAS DRINKING SCOTCH BEFORE IT WAS...oh God...*weeps*)

But what's the result? 

This is one result. Other countries are producing more of their own whiskies to introduce in a global liquor marketplace. Japanese, Indian, Sweden, France, and USA have been. producing more single malts as of late. Tastes are vastly different, but no less enjoyable (opinion...I enjoy a good scotch).

Also, ages of whiskies have been declining rapidly. As I mentioned in an earlier post about JW Gold Label ditching the age statement, older scotches are quickly running dry. Scotland is nearing depletion of mature whiskies. In an effort to keep up with demand, distilleries are releasing younger whiskies to have product now as opposed to 10 years from now. 

2 issues arise. 

1. Higher prices on mature whiskies. I have personally watched the higher aged whiskies increase in price even month to month. Sadly, there's not much I can do about it.

2. Younger whiskies are produced from all around the world. Flavor profiles change. Younger whiskies have vastly different qualities than older whiskies. Also, whiskies from different countries vary HUGELY. Soon the standard will no longer be a Macallan 12, but perhaps a Macallan "Distiller's Choice" with no age statement. It is a sad day when the tradition of Scotch Whisky is forsaken. Traditional values have such a place in scotch whisky mythology and production...and it saddens me. However, that doesn't mean they're not making older whiskies, it just means that now, things are a-changin'.

With more expensive whiskies, I'm going to be more hesitant to enjoy a good scotch on a regular basis. I'm going to want to save my now $85 bottle for special gatherings instead of the end of a workweek. Instead, my go-to will have to me a mediocre Glenrothes or an over-priced JW Black Label (which is a fine scotch, but not for the prices I have seen (upwards of $40 for Black!)). Alas, affordable and whisky are 2 words that are slowly creeping further and further apart. 

I have no solution, I'm afraid. I have introduced scotch to so many of my friends and am happy I did because I have drinking and conversation buddies. But now, maybe I should discourage people from drinking it. Perhaps my next blog post will be how "whisky: gasoline in a glass" is the worst drink of all time, fit only to clean the underside of semi-trucks and the inside of workboots. Maybe y'all will spread the word and soon we can make scotch "uncool." Then, and only then, will we bask in the abundance of affordable whiskies crafted for those with refined tastes (hah) and, more appropriately, the patience and dedication to enjoy a fine beverage. No, I'm not trying to promote snobbery...but with demand comes higher prices and those hit the wallet. 

So, lads and lasses, grab a dram whilst ya can. The price may not be right, but it's as good as it's gonna git!

Age vs. Maturity

Hello all!

I apologize for the delay in posting, the life of a teacher can be very hectic. Couple teaching hundreds of children with an attempt at a personal life and it can become quite overwhelming.

So, today we talk about a delicate and debated aspect of whisky: age.

But don't fear: I will will end with a personal experience of perfect illustration of my point.

Most scotch whiskies sold are sold with an age marking. The common conception is the older the age, the better the whisky. Why else would whiskies get more expensive with age? Well, there are many reasons. Firstly, the older whiskies are a risk: you have to wait longer and hope a great product comes out. Distilleries have to guess years, sometimes decades beforehand what the demand will be for an 18 or 21 year old malt and unless they are employing psychics, there are significant risks. Older = more risks. An older whisky also takes more work and longer time taking up space. For the time 1 cask of 21, you could have had a 12 year, an 8 year, and started on a new cask. 

So why risk it? Well, taste an older whisky and find out.With age comes complexity. In general (IN MY OWN EXPERIENCE (don't go crazy if you've had a different experience)), age softens the alcohol in the taste and brings a smoothness to the character; a mellow depth that grows with time. A permeating darkness of flavor. If I could sum it up in one word, it would be "smoothness." Nothing feels like such pure flavor than a finely aged whisky.

But what about those young-uns? 

The young whiskies must taste like crap! 

Well...usually the youngest of whiskies (3 years minimum) don't taste great. However, to discount a whisky because of its age is a folly and YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED! Ok. Don't be. 

Really, it's ok. 

Most blends use younger whiskies (6,7,8) years old. Younger whiskies tend to be brighter, spicier, and lighter. They also (unfortunately) tend to taste more like alcohol. Red Label has waaaaay more alcohol in the flavor than Gold Label. However, sometimes a young whisky has some amazing flavors.

It comes down to Maturity. Some malts mature at different times. For example, Macallan has a 10 year old that I think tastes no good. It's shallow, crass, and undeveloped. The 12, however, is the gold standard of scotch whisky. Looking for your first bottle? Get a Macallan 12. (Yes, the 10 is fine oak and the 12 is sherry cask, but those flavors aside, the age makes a huge difference). Highlands, Speysides, and Lowlands come in beginning at (mostly) 12 years old at the base expression. Yet, Islay start at 10. Why is that? Islays tend to come in 10 and 16 year varieties while the other come in 12, 15, 18, and 21 year old varieties. Islays mature differently than the mainland malts, so the distillers have deduced that the core expressions need to be different. If a malt ages poorly, it becomes too woody and undrinkable. All vitality is lost in the flavors. Blends typically add a young malt with older. The young brings a vibrancy while the old adds complexity creating a lovely union (aww). If older = better, all whiskies would by 60+ years old!

Distilleries always want a full range of flavors. Ergo, a full range of ages. Italy is a fiery culture that values energy and vibrancy. They prefer young whiskies. The Japanese culture respects age and prefers older age statements. Yet the French just want fruitier flavors, they could give a rat's ass about age! Yet, it is hard to dispel the misgnomer about age and quality. Islays are younger and are lighter in color, which to many show "weakness." They put their scotches in green tinted bottles to hide the color. 

Sneaky sneak.

I have a comparison for you with a very popular whisky. Johnnie Walker Gold Label vs. Blue Label. 

Blends are age-marked by the youngest whisky in the bottle. Gold Label is (was) 18 years, which means the youngest whisky in the blend was 18 years old: there are older whiskies in there. 

Gold Label: a celebratory drink! It's legally an adult! 

Color: GOOOOLLLLDDDD! Really golden, deep, flashy, beautiful

Nose: Oh baby, what a smell. Smoke, cream, honey, heather, hints of peat 

Taste: Smooth, deep, smokey cream, molasses, vanilla, and a sneaky spiciness

Finish: long, drawn-out smokey toffee

Great googa-mooga this is a fine scotch. If you can, get a bottle of the 18 before they change it. This is an experience. 18 years has done this blend some good. Every taste is a torrent of flavor that envelopes your tastebuds with comfort and warmth. It's truly appropriate for celebrations.

Now Blue Label... you notice there is no age marking. Why is that? Well, Johnnie Walker went with a different approach for Blue. Instead of age, they went for rarity of whiskies. Inside the blends of Blue Label are exceedingly rare whiskies. But with no age statement, you can bet there are some that may only be 5 years old. If you put "5 years" on a bottle, people scoff. 

So...they just leave it off.

Easy. But when people go to drink it and expect a strong, superman-style taste...they become disappointed. 

Which leads to my first Blue Label experience. 

Myself and 3 of my friends were scotch drinking buddies. Almost every week, we'd bring what we had and sit down late a night and enjoy some drams talking into the night. Well, we took a trip up to an undisclosed Northern California city where one friend was from. We visited with his family and toured the town. This town...was tiny. The downtown tour took 20 minutes and the highlight feature was an abandoned mall. An empty mall that (apparently) had people to clean it daily despite the fact that not a single store was held within.

Quite strange.

The city's greatest drawn was a marvelous bridge shaped like a sundial. It spanned a river and, to be honest, it was a pretty sweet bridge.

On one side was the parking lot.

On the other...was a swamp. No, really. a bike path surrounded a swamp. 

A bridge to nowhere.

This town was mostly surrounded by forest. My friend's house was at the end of a long path (not paved) with 3 acres of land. His neighbor raised emus. Yes...

So it was wintertime. what do 4 college aged guys do? GO SLEDDING! So we tore up the slopes with the other children (aged under 12) like damned fools. It was great. We had a blast knowing that when darkness came...we would finally pop open the mystical Blue Label. We had brought it all 8 hours of the trip just for the unveiling. We had cigars in the snow (I highly recommend that. Best smoke ever). 

Then the night came. We took out the bottle and gasped with awe. It's a stellar presentation: blue tinted bottle, hanging lanyard, nice box, lovely booklet, the whole nine yards. We took a smell...and it was confusing. It was barely there; a mere whiff. We poured our glasses and drank...and were confused. Where was this highly-touted flavor? Why was it so light colored? Where was the greater-than-gold-label aspect we had read so much about? We ended the night disappointed. 

Well...maybe a month later back in Southern California, we all got together again (as we did) and tried Blue Label again. This time, however, things were different. After research and an understanding of what Blue Label was, we tried again. WOW did it change. Instead of preconceived notions, we allowed the whisky to speak to us. The review is as follows.

Color: Lighter color, yellow-gold

Nose: floral, sweet with leather undertones, some dried fruits and zest with deep undertones of darker hints...

Taste: viscous as all get-out, dried fruits such as plum and raisins, a crisp cream and toffee, deeper brown sugar flavors mix with soft smoke (all without ever getting heavy)

Finish: Complex, light, and long

Every drink was different. First it was floral...then the fruits were at the fore. Soon the sugar/tobacco tastes snuck in. Every taste was an experience. Blue Label requires your attention. It will not talk if you're not listening.

So what I learned was that age is not a determining factor in taste with scotch whisky. Age brings smoothness and depth, yes, but a young whisky can have plenty to say. Gold Label is a strong flavored whisky that tastes and acts it age. Blue is a complex, coy whisky that is easily glossed over. I know many who say Blue tastes like "soapy water." Well, I see that. If you drink to quickly, you never get those flavors; they're not obvious. As with people, sometimes young people shock the shit out of you with their maturity (and older people annoy you with their stupidity). 

Well, I hope I have shown you that age does not equal quality. And yes, that makes your choosing of a whisky that much more difficult. But in the end, just approach each whisky without pretense and you can learn something about it. 

And remember: always try a whisky twice. Maybe you weren't listening the first time...

Slainte Mhath!

What's the Wood got to do with it?

Oh, you thought you knew all the aspects of flavors in a whisky? HAH! You are mistaken, my friend.

Welcome back. Today we broach the subject of casks: what wood, why, and where from?

Traditionally, oak makes the best casks/barrels. Reason? The wood is strong but pliant; able to curve with the gentle shape of a barrel while remaining strong to not snap or crack under stress. Originally, the casks were merely a transportation and storage method. Inn-keepers and customers began noticing that storing them in the casks mellowed the flavors and altered the flavors for the better. BOOM: maturation in barrels.

Back in the beginnings of whisky, casks used for sherry from Spain were readily available, and therefore easily obtainable, and therefore widely used (and therefore once again). The thought process went like this: vast quantities and cheaply obtainable. Then in 1975, the dictator Franco of Spain died and Spain became a democracy. The trade unions demanded that the bottling of wines become a local Spanish business, and the supply became harder to obtain. Sherry fell out of fashion, and distilleries looked elsewhere. Bourbon barrels from the United States became more available, and the UK distilleries began using them...and they noticed different flavor profiles (crazy, right?).

Now, onto the nitty-gritty. What type of oak is preferred? Well, there are several types of oak trees ranging in size (half a dozen in Europe alone!). The preferred variety is Quercus robor aka the pendunculate oak. Q. robor tolerates a wide variety of growing environments typically found in England, France, and the Iberian peninsula (Spain and Portugal).

These trees once fed the Spanish Galleon production of the great era of exploration (Columbus anyone?). Macallan has been the most consistent user of Spanish sherry casks and has always had a steady supply. The city of Lugo is the modern-day center of sherry casks. To make these casks, the trees are cut into staves and air-dried for 12 to 13 months in the sun. The sun and weather washes out some of the tannins (a compound that is bitter in taste and (almost) acts as protection for plants. Too much tannin gives that dry, puckery feeling in wines). The staves then become barrels at a cooperage in Jerez. There, the barrels are used twice: once from 2 weeks to six months, and then a second time of the same length. They are then shipped whole to Scotland to be used for scotch whisky maturation.

The (silly) term used for the sherry casks are sherry butts. They have a 132 gallon capacity. They are big...and their size makes them difficult to handle. The preferred size are called "hogsheads" and are half the size. The hogsheads are usually American Oak (used for bourbon) casks.

American Oak (bourbon) casks have an entire aspect that sherry casks do not have: Charring. The legend goes like this: there was an accidental fire in a distillery that burned the casks. The integrity of the casks were preserved, so the distillery aged the whiskey anyways...and surprise: it was awesome. Realistically, it was an experiment gone right.

Remember: print the legend.

American Oak barrels have 3 levels of charring: light, medium, and alligator (cool).

So what does this have to do with scotch? Well, wood, being an organic compound, changes with weather. During maturation, the heat causes the wood to expand, and contract, allowing the whisky to "breathe" the air. On Islay? Seaweed and salt. In the Highlands? Floral flavors. Also, the type of casks imparts its flavor into the whisky. Sherry casks impart a fruity, nutty flavor while a bourbon barrel can add vanilla and tannins (also a charred flavor depending on how charred it is). Each barrel can be used multiple times: the first having the most profound, the second less, the third a little. If there is a fourth, it is usually used for blends. Some distilleries boast "only first-fill sherry casks used" while others prefer a more mellow second-fill. Many distilleries use both sherry casks and bourbon casks to create something in between (Glenmorangie is a proponent of this method). Remember when I said the wood breathes? Well, it breathes oxygen. Oxygen has a large effect on the liquid inside. Wines must be "aerated" before drinking. Once you open a bottle, it will not last long before oxygen makes the wine stale. With whisky, oxygen has been said to bring out the pleasant flavors of the whisky. When the whisky enters the cask, it brings traces of copper from the stills: that is the catalyst. Those begin to change the oxygen into hydrogen peroxide and that attacks the wood, releasing vanillin. The vanillin promotes oxygenation and brings the "pleasant" flavors to the fore. Vanillin is a naturally occurring element in the oak and gives a vanilla flavor (duh). The climate of tree growth plays a role in what happens during the oxygenation attack: Spanish oak is more resiny, American Oaks have poorer soil, making them heady trees, making them more active in the process of oxygenation. 

OH MY GOODNESS THAT'S SO MUCH STUFF.

Yes. Yes it is. Also, that's not all of it. Balvenie has a 21 year old Portwood scotch as well as a 14 year old Rum Cask.

As you can imagine, they change the flavor in the direction of the previous liquid inside the cask.

It is difficult to find a whisky that is the same liquid, but I have one particular scotch that I have. Lagavulin 16. If you remember, that's a damn fine whisky in my book. There is a "Distiller's Edition" (more on that another time) that has been matured in Pedro Ximenez casks near the end of its maturation. 

Lagavulin is a hearty whisky of seaweed, iodine, salt, peat, and warmth. I thought to myself as I shelled out a good chunk of change for the D.E. "What will the wine cask do to the flavor? How can a fruity, dry wine add anything to such a strong, bold flavored whisky?" Well...wow. 

Just

Wow

Let me give a brief review of both...

Lagavulin 16

Color: Deep amber, very viscous

Nose: Ocean, peaty, smoky (fo sho). Very strong nose

Taste: Warmth all over, peat and smoke, undertones of vanilla, oily, grassy, salty campfire.

Finish: Long and beautiful.

Now...if that doesn't make you want a dram, nothing will.

Here we go...

Lagavulin Distiller's Edition; Double-Matured in Pedro Ximenez sherry casks

Color: Deep amber with a reddish hue (obviously the sherry cask influence)

Nose: Still peaty and smoky (but less so), raisins, honey

Taste: Warm, warm, warm...there is the peaty/smoky base and oily viscous body, but an enveloping hug of fruit (raisins and cream). Overall mellower and rounder

Finish: Less intense, but longer and sweeter; smoooooooooth

It's as if the opposites completed each other by merging in a way one would not think possible. The wood began merely as a transportation and holding device. Yet, what a development. How amazing. Who knows what other casks distillers may use in the future. I, for one, support every experiment.

Slainte mhath!

The Flash of Platinum (Label)

Hello again! It has been a bit of time since I have posted, so I do apologize. My job as a teacher has me working like a madman, so I think a once-weekly post will be a regular occurrence.

But onto the heart of the matter today. I will review the new Johnnie Walker Platinum Label.

Firstly, as with Johnnie Walkers, this is a blend. an 18 year blend. Blends are age-marked by their youngest whisky,so the youngest whisky in Platinum is 18. The thinking behind Platinum Label on JW's marketing side is geared towards the Asian Market specifically. A friend of mine was touring the Pacific Rim (KAIJU!) with an Asian orchestra/cult a few years ago, and he spied Platinum in the duty-free catalog in flight. He texted me and I immediately set to work! I looked up where this mysterious label had materialized from. As it turns out, JW was testing its sale in Asia. The Asian market and Asian consumers tend to value age and status highly. It was that thought that caused JW to create an older aged, highly touted blend; they called it a "premium product." As opposed to Italy, which values young flavor full of spice (but not too heavy) or the French whisky market which enjoys a good fruit flavor, the Asian Markets want that status symbol and that age marking. Platinum: more valuable than Gold.

Fast forward a few years and Platinum Label has made its way to the USA. I was planning on waiting until next month to purchase, but a very dear friend was visiting from out of town, and another dear friend was visiting from even further out of town. These were also the 2 gentlemen that were with me the first night any of us had our first scotch experience with JW Green Label. And how appropriate that Platinum replaces Green in JW's lineup.

Storytime later. Reviewtime now.

Color: Dark, hints of orange, viscous, does not stick to glass. It looks as if it is one solid entity trying to stick together.
Nose: Herbal, slightly spicy (but in a minty way), raisins, vanilla/caramel/whipped cream
Taste: Very light, herbal (mint, menthol), dark dried fruity undertone, whipped cream, cinnamon juuuust on top.
Finish: Quick, clean finish

The most unusual aspect of this particular whisky was how cold it sat on the tongue. Many times, alcoholic beverages burn, right? Well, Platinum is as cold as ice. No rock necessary. It's the same cool feeling of a mouthwash (but nothing like the taste).

Ok, here comes the extra baggage. That finish is short, too short for my taste. And how different it truly is from any of the other blends. It is a fitting profile, because it did "replace" Green Label. Green was a very different blend because it was a vatted whisky (only single malts, no grain whiskies). Green Label tasted much different than Black, Red, or Gold Label (Blue has its own category). Green was complex, it was coy, it made you work. It rewarded that work with a quiet intensity. Alas, they killed off Green Label in favor of Platinum. The easiest thing to do is compare it to Gold Label.

Both are 18 year old blends and both are named after precious metals. Their prices are within $10 of each other, with Platinum being slightly more expensive, so negligible. Why would you choose Platinum? Well...you wouldn't. Not for the price. Don't get me wrong, I am absolutely glad I bought Platinum and would have done the same thing...but it's not worth the price. It is not with the likes of Gold. It is definitely more like Green. Gold Label tastes brilliant, bright, sparkling, shiny, and everything you imagine with Gold. It has a honey sweetness, a smoky body, a creamy viscous quality, and a finish that will last and last and last...truly a scotch for a celebration. Platinum is a contemplative scotch. It is non-offensive, one I think you could (honestly) give to anyone and they won't scrunch their face in revulsion. Most non-whiskyphiles akin whisky to gasoline. I think that Platinum is one they could choke down. I feel Platinum makes no statements and assumes no position, but smoothness was the quality, above all, JW was going for. There is no sharp edges, no particular area where it excels, but that is its excellence. This scotch is the smoothest blend I've ever had, bar none. Yet, in that smoothness, the finish lacks. The moment you swallow and exhale, its gone. 

So overall...I enjoy Platinum. Honestly, it would be the one I out in a decanter and serve after-dinner. But, it's too expensive for that and methinks I'd rather put JW Swing instead. 

And in relation to Green Label, Platinum is a different experience. Where Green is an exploration of all of Scotland, where the flavors dance and play upon the tongue, Platinum feels like an arrival point; a definitive change in focus. Platinum is the heralding of a new JW direction: premium and status. Scotch has an inherit sophistication (with a whiff of old fart-ness), but Platinum is (in my opinion) an attempt to modernize and add a cool factor to sophistication. Green was a flavor expedition. Platinum is a calculated smoothness. The conversation with my scotchphiles on our tasting of Platinum was one of muted discussion. To be fair, we're all older and it was late (which is difficult to stay up all night when you're older!). But I felt that while tasting, there was not excitement. Oh ho, there was anticipation. We were giddy as children. The slick box Platinum comes in has a fasted top that requires a button push to open: cool. But after the taste, there was no "Aaaaaaahhhhhh" moment. There was no awed silence. There was a content "Mm." Platinum is weightless and light; smooth above all else. And as a result, it spurs no conversation. It does not cause as much pause in conversation. With a truly effectual scotch, there is silence at first: a long, sustained awe. A frank discussion of taste, then repeat...the intricacies are fleshed out. And just as the scotch has depth, our minds are deepened. Soon our conversations become honest and varied. No malice passes our lips, but vehement disagreement among men (or women (I ain't no sexist)). Platinum, instead, lacks those characters, keeping our mindset in the now, in the present. There was no timeless conversation, there were no energetic or emotional declarations: it was smooth. For my money, the best JW 18 year old blend you can get is Gold. 

UPDATE

So in reading, I have a worrisome discovery. (also, astute observers would notice the picture I posted). Gold Label 18yr will be phased out (read: discontinued) after this year. Instead, JW will have "Gold Label Reserve" without an age marking. That means there is no guarantee of age. Definitely worrisome. Maybe there won't be a change of flavor: who knows! But would you spend Gold Label price for something that could be as young as 3? That's wild speculation on the age part, I'm playing paranoid crazy. But it is interesting that they drop the age for the word "Reserve." I wonder what will change...

And why should there be a change to their (let's be realistic) flagship? Blue may be the priciest, but the one everyone can drink (although its pricy) is Gold. Gold is standard (get it? Gold standard). It's celebratory. Why change what isn't broken? Why change what is extraordinary? Why not come out with "Platinum Label Reserve?" Apparently Platinum was only served to guests of JW until being released now. JW is moving in a new direction, for better or for worse. I have a sudden urge to purchase Gold Label 18yr before it becomes Reserve...

UPDATE AGAIN

Looks like Gold Label Reserve will be $20 cheaper (a reflection of the lack of age). In musing over the topic, one reason I can think is that perhaps the amount of 18yr single malts is become scarce and/or too expensive to make Gold Label 18yr (or too cost inefficient). With the new Reserve and Platinum, there is a whisky for any price: $15, $25, $30, $50, $60, $100, $150. The range is there (although it was there before in a way, but this a planned, marketing-driven decision). Looks like Gold won't be worth what it used to...

Whisk(e)y? Bourbon? ...what?

So maybe you've seen, but people cannot seem to agree on how to spell whisky. Some say whisky, some say whiskey. 

What's the deal?!

Well, much like all squares are quadrilaterals, but not all quadrilaterals are squares, all bourbons are whiskies, but not all whiskies are bourbons (same with scotch).

The general rule is...if the country of origin has an "e" in the name, use an e spelling whiskey. United States, Ireland come to mind, and look: whiskey. Scotland and Canada: no e, so whisky. Does it mean different liquids? Well, yes, but they are all whiskies. Remember, a whisky is a spirit distilled from a sort of grain: wheat, barely, corn, or rye. 

So is bourbon any good? There are many malt-whisky snobs that will say, "Filthy American whiskey is weak, uncultured,and a mere knock-off of Scottish whisky. These are also the same single malt snobs who will tell you blends are garbage.

Well they are incorrect. 

The history of bourbon is a much more recent invention because the US is a much younger country. European settlers brought with them the technical know-how of distillation and maturation into Kentucky in the late 19th centiry, the home of bourbon. There, the available grain was corn. Opportunity and desire came together and...ta-da! Elijah Craig is often credited with "inventing bourbon," but the process materialized in multiple places. Craig was the first to be credited with using charred oak barrels to mature his whiskey. As previously stated, scotch whisky often uses already-used American white oak bourbon casks to mature the scotch in. Bourbon uses the brand-new barrels. However, they char them to the darkness they feel is correct. The charring adds a significant flavor to the whiskey inside the casks itself. Bourbon gained popularity for its flavors, and also its price (way cheaper than cognac). One thing bourbon distillers do that is a unique invention is called the "sour mash." what that means is for every new fermentation (the germination of the grain in water with yeast), the distiller would take some old mash and add it to the new mash. Doing so keeps a consistent pH level across batches and keeps a more consistent product. Seemingly, the same strain of yeast from the dawn of the distillery could still be in use today in some form!

Bourbon vs. Scotch whisky...a tricky thing. What I am about to say next will be a very general comparison and in no way reflect any individual whisk(e)y and can be disputed SO DON'T GET MAD FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!

Bourbon tends to have more vanilla qualities, more cinnamon, and much sweeter, almost like candy (caramel, sugar). Scotch tends to be heavier, buttery-er, peppery, salty. 

Unlike scotch, bourbon does not age as well. The distillers go for "maturity" rather than a specific age marking (of course scotch goes for maturity as well, but scotch ages very well hence the Dalmore 64). Bourbon is much lighter because of the younger age. 

Preference is what it comes down to, really. I have had a bottle of Elijah Craig 12...so I will give it a review! 

Firstly, it's cheap. It was $25 when I bought it. That's a steal for any scotch, so already the price is noticeably different.

Color: Deep orange/light amber. (contradictory, I know; overall a translucent darkness)

Nose: Sweeeeet. Caramel, apple. vanilla, charred honey with some nuts on the edges

Taste: Sweeeeet. Charred honey, vanilla, cooked fruits, but very dry and spicy (not pepper)

Finish: long and hot

This, to me, is a benchmark bourbon. A solid bourbon that epitomizes what a bourbon should taste like. It wasn't spectacular, but it certainly exceeded its price and satisfied. Something you could drink anytime. It's a light, playful drink in comparison with many scotches, and I could see myself ordering this at a bar if I wanted to put myself in a playful mood. A scotch from a bar puts one in a contemplative, conversational mood. 

Aaaaaaaaand I have a story. The first time I had this particular whiskey. A friend of mine had brought to my attention a Groupon for a whiskey tasting at a bar about 30 minutes away. $40 for $90 worth of whiskies. 

YES.

Well, we drove out to find this bar. We followed our GPS to the supposed location...and found nothing. There was a Del Taco, and a strip mall with everything closed. So we drove in circles, looked and looked...and saw this door in the back corner near the edge. It was a red door with black, dirty walls. And over the door hung a tiny, beat-up sign of the bar (the name which escapes me now). So we go in and it was a shock. Dim lighting, motorcycle paraphernalia on the walls, rock and roll legends abound, jukebox in the corner, bars set-up for people to buy HUGE quantities of beer and have a tap at their own table, pool tables, and some ugly looking dudes and chicks. Us two music majors did not quite fit in. On top of the liquor cabinet, lining almost the whole way were boxes of Jameson 18 Irish Whiskey with peoples' names on them and tiny locks. You could buy yourself a bottle to keep at the bar to drink whenever you came in. So this bar is a local bar. 

Fun. 

We tepidly walk up to the bar and see a young lady bartender and ask about our Groupon. She has heard of it, and we sit to choose from the fair amount of whiskies on their list. We each get 5. Now if we were smarter, we would have written down every whiskey we tried. I remember a Dewar's White Label (first and only time I've ever had that filth), Elijah Craig, Bulliet, Woodford Reserve, Gentleman Jack...Jameson 12...and I forgot the rest. Well, we sit down and give her the list and she promptly tells us she has no idea where most of these are, so "it's gon' be a while, hun." Well, we were in the bar for a good hour and a half overall. During that time, we had a QUADRUPLE of each whiskey. 

It was

A LOT

of whiskey.

I had some good, some bad, many forgettable (but maybe because I was inebriated). I remembered liking the Elijah Craig, so I bought a bottle. However, there was a Knob Creek Single Barrel that was (get this) 120 proof. That's 60% abv. My lips were a-tingle after each sip. There was some serious alcohol happening. Well, we survived our rock/biker bar encounter and stumbled to Del Taco to eat some food and sober up. After some time had passed and some food had settled, we went home. 

The experience was very American to me. If that bar had served scotch (not Dewar's...that doesn't count), the venue would have been inappropriate. Bourbon, with its youthful charm and sweet allure fit perfectly.

So explore your whiskies. Bottom's Up!

Campbeltown Whiskies: The Lost Region

Welcome back ye lads and lasses. Today I take a crack at the "lost" region, the Campbeltown with one of its standards bottlings, the Springbank 10.

Now we all remember the 4 main regions: Highland, Lowland, Speyside, and Islay. You can add "islands" as a general of any islands off the coast such as Skye (Talisker).

There we have a good map. Each region has a distinct flavor profile shaped by the geography and culture.

Yet...there is another I briefly mentioned. As a matter of fact, it used to be the "Whisky Capital." In 1759, there was said to be 32 different distilleries in the region (some other sources have the number at a little less). 

This map has the Campbeltown region on it, while the previous one did not. Why? Well the distilleries died out. That's...pretty much it. With the years, come economic changes and the area was over-saturated. There are currently 3 distilleries active: Springbank, Glengyle, and Glen Scotia. Like the Lowlands, there are a few. Campbeltown is making a resurgence under the guidance of Hedley Wright. He is an alcohol baron and owns both the Springbank and Glengyle distilleries (and luckily for us, he likes them (or maybe he likes money. Either way, good for us)).  

The geography of the small town of Campbeltown is at the end of the Kintyre Peninsula. It is nearly surrounded by the sea meaning there is a harbor. Ships and sea-borne traffic bustle past the quiet distillery. The seaside locale is often shrouded in mist from the sea (this will come back later). Even on the map. you can see that Campbeltown is near Islay. There share many similar flavors, but are certainly not the same.

Campbeltown, in my mind, is a lovely go-between an Islay and a mainland whisky. There is a strong saltiness and peatiness, but not the *sometimes* overwhelming flavors of an Islay. Campbeltown whiskies are markedly lighter in viscosity and flavors than an Islay, but do not have the fruitiness or spiciness of a Highland or Speyside. It is almost as if a Lowland delicacy was injected with an Islay kick. 

Now...ON TO THE MAIN EVENT

What an awesome picture, eh? This is from the Kintyre Piping Society Invitational Solo Piping Competition (what a mouthful) sponsored by the Springbank Distillery. What a perfect image of Scotland. Springbank is one of the few distilleries that do not Chill Filter their whiskies. What that means is they do not chill their whiskies before bottling. Most distilleries chill before bottling because when you shill a whisky for the first time, the liquid becomes hazy: a natural process where the fatty acid, proteins, and esters are not filtered out leading to a haziness when cooled. There is no effect on taste between chill filtered and non-chill filtered...or is there?! Depends who you ask. Distilleries that chill filter say it is purely for cosmetic reasons. Those distilleries who do not chill filter say their whisky is more pure.

Whatever.

Again, the only way to every really know is to get the same whisky, one filtered one not, and taste them. But that will never happen. They also "two-and-a-half" times distill it, giving the whisky a delicacy found in Lowlands.

Moving on.

Springbank also has no color added. They have a thing for the purity of their whisky. Many whisky producers add color for cosmetic reasons. Again, no effect on the flavor (so they say...). The Springbank 10 comes at 46% abv, more than the standard 40%. Purer? Maybe. Sounds like a lot of hullabaloo, but when you're trying to champion a comeback of your specific region, I suppose you should try and create a distinct character and profile for yourself.

Now the review of the Springbank 10.

Color: Gold.
Nose: Light saltiness, gentle peat, spiciness, undertones of warm pears (not cold ones, cooked pears)
Taste: Viscous, oily texture. Cooked pears, dry, smoke on top
Finish: An afterthought of burned fruit

Like the Islay malts, Springbank malts are younger aged, but certainly not lacking in complexity. You can certainly tell it is younger, but only in the weight of the malt. The youngster here is quite well-spoken. The juxtaposition of sweet and dry is not marred by any overpowering flavors from either side. Rather, they coexist without mixing...until the finish where the smoke and gentle fruitiness come together.

What a treat.

What's with the Wood?

Hello, hello. So, we've covered the regions where scotch comes from. We've gone over how still can make a difference. How about the cask? 

Well, the answer is a definitive yes. Absolutely. Incredibly large difference.

First of all, scotch whisky in matured in wooden casks for a number of years after distillation. The minimum in 3 years and maximum, well there is a Dalmore 60... I'll stop drooling now.

Scotch Whisky rarely (if ever) uses new casks, The distillers always borrow a used cask from a different type of alcohol. Generally, Scottish distilleries use American White Oak casks used in the making of Bourbon, another type of whiskey. Other casks include Sherry casks from Spain, Wine casks from various countries (red or port), and even rum casks. 

American Oak casks often come charred (burned on the inside) to 3 varying intensities with the most charred called "alligator charring." (that's cool, methinks). Bourbon has a much more vanilla taste, a maple/flavoring with a different type of spice palate. Obviously, the scotch maturing in the cask will absorb some of the characteristics of the bourbon. Casks may be used up to 3 times, buteach successive   usage will lessen the flavors added by the cask. Johnnie Walker makes use of thedifferent intensities   of charred with their "Double Black" label which is Black Label matured in a more-charred cask. The same liquid, the same length of maturation, a wide variance of flavors. Where Black Label is sweet, viscous, and smokey, Double Black is cooler, smokier, and more coy. 

The next (and arguably most preferred) cask in the Sherry Casks. Sherry casks give a sweeter finish,making the  color more reddish and the flavors infused with a deep fruitiness. Macallan is famous for their use of sherry casks. The Macallan has 2 main lines of scotch: the fine Oak and the sherry casks. The standard and most popular Macallan are the 12 and 18, both sherry casks. The better known Fine Oak ages are the 10, 15, and there is a fine oak 18 but I have never seen it in person. In trying the fine oak Macallan (both 10 and 15), I found the flavors to be lacking: to light, too spicy for the whisky. I feel Macallan should stick to the sherry casks: damn do thy taste good!

Next is wine. Wine casks can come from Spain, France, Portugal, etc etc. Lagavulin Distiller's Edition is finished in Pedro Ximenez wine casks. My previous review of the Lagavulin 16 was essentially a sturdy, wam, oily, smokey whisky with luscious flavor. A true great. The Distiller's Edition...adds a whole new level of depth. The harshness of the iodine is dissipated while adding a layer of gentle, deep fruit and mellow cream. It enlightens the whisky. WOW. 

The Balvenie 21 Portwood is also a wonderful example of wine cask usage. Port is a type of wine originating in Portugal. Port wine is more alcoholic than standard wine and is much heavier and fruiter. Because of the sweetness, it is called a "dessert wine" in the States (and as a result is not respected. Too bad. Port is fantastic). The sweet fruitiness and sugary flavors absolutely permeate into the Balvenie. 

Finally, we end at rum. Balvenie 14 Caribbean Rum Cask. I have yet to try it...but I will. It;s quite intriguing. I have, however, had Angel's Envy Bourbon matured in rum casks. The bourbon was enhanced greatly by the flavors of the rum cask. I'm not sure how rum will act with scotch, but i think it will end up being more like sherry with more pepper and less fruit. 

So there you have it. A (not really) quick and dirty to casks and the places and liquids they come from. Next time: a review!

The Still of Distillation: Superstition, Madness, or Genius?

Scotch whisky is a liquid of much superstition. Steeped in tradition, any deviation or adaptation to modern time sis met with apprehension. Since the craft is hundreds of years old, much of the science of flavors is hard to pin down.

Which brings me to the shape of the stills. In the distillation process, the fermented liquid is boiled in the stills and is condensed via 1 of 2 ways. The traditional way is called a "Worm Tub" and is a long, curving pipe that passes through cold water. The more modern way is a large pipe containing smaller tubes full of the cold water. The distillate evaporates through the large pipe, passing the cooled tubes.

I'm not even going to touch whether or not the Worm-Tub is the best way vs. modern technology...not yet. I'm looking at the shape of the still themselves.

The list goes on, and on, and on...

There are MANY shapes, from pears to onions, Lanterns to lamps, extra tubing or purifiers, the list goes on. Then does the pipe that carries vapor exit at an angle or vertical? Perhaps and downward angle? 

Firstly, scotch whisky stills are made of copper. Copper is popular because it is easier to work with, absorbs sulphur and yeast from the mixture (undesirables in a finished product), reduces bacterial contamination, and is an excellent temperature transfer. 

Now the shape, oh the shape. What a wicked web we weave. There is much speculation about what the shape does for the finished product, but it is all anecdotal; nothing proven by science and/or experiment. Taller still are argued to catch much condensation before it exits, causing it to fall back down for a second distillation known as "reflux." Because of the "redistillation," taller still are said to have a more delicate flavor (much like the triple distilled Lowlands). Conversely, a short, fat still is said to be oiler, fuller, and richer. Some distilleries have been known to take extreme measures when replacing a still to keep the original shape. If the original still had a dent, the new still would be created with the same dent in the same place.

How can we tell? Well, certain regions all have the same basic shapes and, as we know, regions tend to have similar flavor profiles (mostly). Aaaaaannnnnndddddd the distilleries tell us so....

But I think there are some more practical reasons. Firstly,since many of the distilleries did not begin large, the space was limited. Many of the original still were shaped to fit in a small farmhouse. Tall ceiling but little floorspace? Tall and skinny. Basement with low ceiling but lots of floorspace? Short and fat. Also, the original still were made by the local coppersmith. He had a certain way of doing things, so all the still in the area would resemble one another.

The only way to know is to take an established distillery and still and completely change the still without changing the liquid or process. However, which master distiller will waste an entire batch of perfectly good whisky on a silly thing like that? (none).

Does this mean there is nothing to the tradition? Of course not. I just think that maybe there's a mystique about the stills that is more fun to perpetuate. From The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, a classic John Wayne Western movie (SEE IT), 

"When the legend becomes fact, print the legend." 

Slàinte mhath!

What's in a (whisky) Glass...

A brief entry today about what glass you should drink your whisky out of and why. It's important and completely changes your experience (no joke).

If you are unfamiliar, there is a different wine glass for every type of wine out there. Bunches and bunches. Each glass is supposed to accentuate a certain flavor from he variety of wine that no other glass can.

I'm not going to sit here are tell you that you need 5 different scotch glasses: 1 for each region plus a blended glass. No no no no no.

But you will need a whisky glass.

But where to start?

It looks daunting, but chill out! You'll notice something...there are 2 types of shapes on that large, long list of pictures. There is the standard "rocks" style glass (old Madison Avenue) that and roughly the same circumference on top as they are on the bottom, or the top is wider than the bottom. Also, usually the glasses are angles, not curved. Madison Ave Glasses, Rocks Glasses, etc. These are appropriate for rocks (duh) and mixed drinks, but should not be the go-to for whisky.

The other style of glasses have a gentle curve where the lip on the glass is smaller than the bottom. The idea is that the smells are concentrated into your nose at 1 area instead of seeping everywhere. Whisky begins evaporating with air, that's what liquids do and that's what you smell when you do smell. The smaller opening puts all the vapors in one p[lace for sniffing. Also, when drinking, the smells go into your nose instead of your face.

Richard Paterson recommends the Copita Nosing Glass.

This is my go-to scotch glass. 

He also reccomends the Glencairn Whisky Glasses 

This is my social set of 4. 

The reason these glasses rate the highest in my opinion is that the shape cradles the whisky at the bottom, and concentrates the smells at the top only if you smell it or drink it. The shape holds the whisky down in the glass. A rocks glass allows air currents to swirl and sneak in and steal your smells. Also, you never, NEVER want to hold your glass by the surface touching the whisky. Direct hand contact to the portion your whisky is touching will warm the whisky. No no. Instead, with the copita, hold the stem or the base. The Glencairn, hold the base.

You'll never see these glasses at a bar because they are delicate and would be destroyed. But you, you discerning whisky enthusiast you, will take care of it. 

Don't cheat yourself out of a wonderful experience by drinking out of a sippy-cup. 

Drink like a Scotsman. 

Slàinte mhath!

Cheap Scotch Whisky

Up till this moment, I've talked about some pretty pricey scotches. None really less than $30 or so dollars, most above $50. I've talked of how you take care of your glass, how you nurture the flavors, and how you savor the moments spent with it.

"Come on!" you say, "I'm broke! What about all the cheap scotches? Are they garbage or what?"

Well, that's the question I intend to address today. Sort of.

When I talk cheap scotches, I talk of the types that you see at every bar, the "house" scotch they grab for mixed drinks. The drinks they bring you in Vegas for free whilst gambling. I have tasted a few and will address 2 of them specifically while mentioning others.

Here are the cheap-o scotches I have tasted:

Johnnie Walker Red Label $18
Dewar's White Label $18
Chivas Regal $20
Cutty Sark $20
J & B Scotch $22
Trader Joe's Highland Malt $16

There are several more amongst this price range, but these are what I have had.

Firstly, I will say that Glenfiddich 12 and Glenlivet 12 are in the price range but are certainly not cheap-o. They are cheap and lacking in comparison with other single malts, but they are leagues better than any of the aforementioned.

All of the aforementioned scotches are blended except the Trader Joe's. Blends are cheaper to produce because you can make vast quantities by adding grain whiskies. Obvious from a business standpoint. These cheap-o blends tend to be light, strong alcohol flavor, hints of smoke, but generally that's it. You can tell it's a scotch though!

I will separate the JW Red Label.

Red Label is the lowliest of Jw and it shows. However, although you can taste the alcohol (which is a sign of immaturity), it still retains the qualities of JW: smoke, smoothness, a bit of cream, and slight nuttiness. Red Label is very light because of its 8 year age. The age on a blend marks the youngest whisky in the blend (that means it could be blended with older whiskies). Red Label is LOVELY for making Scotch and Coke. Man, that drink is tasty. I highly recommend it. Red Label melds well into the Coke where the alcohol flavors disappear. I had a scotch and Coke in Vegas with Dewar's...and it was miserable. Nearly undrinkable if I wasn't trying to continue my inebriation.

But the only single malt here is the Trader Joe's Highland Single Malt. I actually was given a blind taste by my girlfriend's father,. eager to test my palate. I figured highland, less than $20. BOOM! In research, it is bottled by Trader Joe's and taken from the Tullibardine Distillery in Aberdeen Scotland. Owned by the Alexander Murray Co, they sell large volumes of whiskies and vodkas to other companies for bottling. http://alexandermurray.com/production.html This is a common practice, but usually more reputable distilleries oblige. Battle Hill Whisky takes leftovers from many distilleries and ages them one extra year before bottling. You get Macallan 19, Lagavulin 17, Aberlour 16, and other nodd year marking. Costco often does this (Kirkland brand). It seems an easy way to get a high-end scotch for a severely reduced price! Well, my Battle Hill tastes have been less than stellar. It seems that the ones who know their product best are the distilleries themselves. 

Go figure.

Back to the TJ Highland 10 year old. For a cheap scotch, it's pretty good. 

Color: Pale yellow/gold

Nose: Straw, floral, slightly biscuity

Taste: light, slightly smoky, and...nothing much else

Finish: bitter

Really, when compared to any other single malt, it falls flat. The taste doesn't match the nose, and the aftertaste is bitter and short. However...for the price, you can't go wrong. My hip flask is full of the TJ Highland 10. Good for a mix drink, and it has some sort of character as opposed to the bland, awful blends like Dewar's. 

If I reccomend cheap scotches, I would drink...

JW Red Label

Chivas Regal

Trader Joe's Highland 10

Stay away from J&B, Dewar's, and Cutty Sark (even for mixed drinks). You won't regret the extra buck spent on a drink you can sip without regret.

Scotch on the Rocks? NEVER!

You've heard it before in a movie. A gentleman appearing smooth and debonaire orders a scotch on the rocks and everyone oohs and aaahs.

Now, if you've been following my instructions, you've already watched Master Blender Richard Paterson tell you to never get it "on the rocks." The crumbly sound of a bartender reaching for ice is a terrible sound indeed. I'm going to talk about why you don't get it "on the rocks," where the hell that phrase comes from, and what you can do instead.

Firstly, look at the picture above. How much volume is taken up by the ice? Half? A Third? Shoot, it's more than necessary. Why do you want to dilute your spirit? You paid good money for that liquor, so don't bland it to death! If you ordered a fine quality Clam Chowder, don't drown it in Tabasco! And look, it's not cool to order a scotch on the rocks. Don't drink scotch because it's cool, drink it because you want to have the pleasure of drinking it. Order it "neat." That means nothing but scotch. Bartenders worth a damn will give a slight acknowledgment that, "Hey, this guy knows some stuff," and then give you a decent amount. I've never been disappointed with the amount of whisky served me when ordered neat (as opposed to ordering a rum and coke and finding it mostly coke and ice with hardly any rum). 

The phrase "on the rocks" comes from an earlier Scotland. Scots would find need of cooling their drink, so they would walk to the nearest river and grab a stone (or a rock) and plop it in their drink. Ta-da! Scotch on the rocks.

But now you ask, what can I do?! There are no rivers nearby!

Chill. No, literally. You can chill your glass beforehand in the freezer. Or you can buy your own whisky rocks. 

They're made of soapstone so they won't scratch you glass and do a good job of cooling your scotch. I keep a rocks glass with 4 rocks in it in my freezer at all times. Just in case. This assures that the scotch will not be diluted, but will still be chilled. Richard Paterson suggests the adding of a small amount of cold, distilled water to your whisky. When I received my Copita Nosing Glass, it came with a pipette (eye dropper thing) intended for the scientific adding of drops of water.

Now, the more important question: why? Why do you want a cold whisky? Why do you not want to dilute it? But Paterson says to do so? Well, whisky is usually bottled at 40% abv. Whisky is NOT, I repeat, NOT 40% abv naturally. Water is added before bottling in order to bring the alcoholic content down. Some whiskies bottle at what is called "Cask Strength," i.e. the abv level of the cask. Most add water to attain 40%. Paterson suggest 38% by way of adding water. What does such a small amount of water do? Well, is softens the flavors of the scotch; takes away some edges. Mostly, the harsh smokiness or saltiness is lessened and the overall palate is lighter and clearer. A Lagavulin 16 is a heavy scotch, warm, full, oily, salty, and peaty. Add a bit of water, and it becomes less peaty, less smoky, less salty, and the undertones of nuts and butter come forth. It's a way of equalizing the harsh flavors and the subtle flavors. 

Same goes for temperature. A cold scotch will hit your tongue crisp! The flavors will bounce and dance on your tongue. A warm scotch will lazily sliiiiide into your throat. I like to start cold because it will always heat up, but you can't cool it with your hand. And in my experience, a warmer scotch's flavors are harder to distinguish, almost as if they meld into one complete picture. A cold scotch, to me, seems easier to pick out the individual traits. 

So what have we learned?

1. Never order your scotch "on the rocks."

2. Chill a glass or some rocks to cool your drink.

3. A little bit of water is ok (and eve good), but too much (as in ice) will leave your drink weak in flavor and content.

4. If you are at a bar and really, really want a cold scotch, ask for 1, *maybe* 2 ice cubes.

As with anything scotch related, try many things! 2 drops? A spill? Ice cold? Lukewarm? No one drinks the same. I find it amazing that 1 scotch, say Cragganmore 12, can taste so vastly different utilizing temperature and water. Cragganmore is a coy, stealthy Speyside. Cold, it is dark and brooding, mellow but crisp. Warm it is buttery and viscous; sliding to and fro. Add a bit of water, and the darkness dissipates leaving a brilliant clarity of golden sunlight filled with floral notes on top of butternut almonds and smoke. My friends and I will often drink the same 3 malts first at the same time, but experiment with differing treatments. Much like our conversations. We all speak on the same topic, but we approach from different angles (Devil's advocate and whatnot). There is no right way to drink nor to speak, and the experiences are all vastly different...but we all become more enriched because of our differences. A melding of ideas and experiences enriches us all.

Glenkinchie 12 Year-old

Today I will be reviewing the Lowland Classic Malt Glenkinchie 12. As I spoke before, the Lowlands region only has 3 distilleries active. This malt is part of the "Classic Malts Collection" which are, well, malts that are classic. Classic Malts are Glenkinchie, Dalwhinnie, Cragganmore, Talisker, Oban, and Lagavulin. Lowland malts are distinctly delicate. The reason for this is they are triple distilled. Distillation is the boiling and evaporation of the barley mash, then collection again. 3 times the work, 3 times the loss of liquid. Every time you distil a whisky, you lose a bit to the air. This is nicknamed the "Angel's Share." If that's the case, angels are Lowland drinkers. The malt itself is called the "Edinburgh Malt." In my research, the distillery opend in the 1820s or 1830s in a farming community located in the glen of Kinchie burn. See what they did there: glen of Kinchie.

The triple distillation makes this whisky delicate, sublime, and...difficult to pin down. I'll give the standard review before getting too esoteric...

Color: pale gold; wheat colored

Nose: Grassy, dried flowers, light, a dash of honey with some gentle nuttiness

Taste: Light, light light; grassy and lightly fruity with a hint of smoke

Finish: smokier, gassier, calm; medium-long (but not heavy)

Now the Glenkinchie attracted me because I had only had Auchentoshan from the lowlands (12 and threewood). I wanted to expand my lowlands experience. also, I was (am currently) intrigued by having all the classic malts. I have owned every bottle except the Oban and the Glenkinchie. So I decided on the 12, their standard bottling. This malt, to me, is a summertime malt. The lightness and color is akin to the dry grasses of an ending summer's day. The Lowlands in Scotland are predominantly flat and densely populated. The flat ground led to farming, which is the well-spring of civilization. I find that in drinking the Glenkinchie while it is hot outside, it has an equalizing effect on me. Much like the hottest areas on Earth, the people drink hot tea to cause sweating, I feel this malt does a similar effect. It is quite herbal and grassy, but never overwhelming because (I think) due to the triple distillation. If distilled once, I think the grassiness would be overwhelming. The herbal qualities would take over and you'd lose the subtle nuttiness and underlying sweetness. However, with time comes temperance, and the malt is finely balanced. Currently, I sit sweating in the heat of an august evening and the Glenkinchie is a wonderful companion. Drinking it feels like drinking air: the liquid is so light that the only sensation I have entering my palate is one of tase, not temperature, weight, or texture. The liquid is not viscous, but quite watery (in a good way). Many people can drink this malt easily without being overwhelmed by its nose or taste. 

However...most lack the patience to search for the flavors hiding around the periphery. This is a coy malt, only yielding its secrets to those who search. Where Lagavulin ANNOUNCES ITS PRESENCE, the Glenkinchie is happy never speaking...unless you ask. And pry. And cozy up to it. 

A coy malt with a gentle reward, Glenkinchie 12 is definitely a classic worth trying.

The Regions

Welcome welcome. Today I will be speaking about the different regions of whisky distillation in Scotland. This discussion of flavors only applies to single malts. Blends are blends of different regions...so it's a mixture.

Now, there are 4 main regions of whisky distillation* (actually there is 5...but I'll explain later). They are the Highlands, Lowlands, Speyside, and Islay.

Lowlands: The most delicate of the regions. Light, herbal, and complex, the Lowlands region is the southern half of the main body of Scotland. There are only 3 lowlands distilleries active. They Bladnoch, Auchentoshan and Glenkinchie. The Lowlands is the only region using the triple distillation method. Each malt is distilled 3 times before being casked and bottled. I think the main reason other regions do not is that it's time consuming! 3 times the time necessary. Also, flavor-wise, other regions do not lend themselves to such delicacy. Lowlands are widely enjoyed by many, but they lack the romanticism of the Highlands. The Lowlands geography is flat, for from the dramatic hill and mountains of the Highlands or the craggy coasts of Islay. Lowlands are a perfect summer's day scotch. One can taste the grass in the heat, the delicate flowers from the breeze, the supple sweetness of the honey, and all without offending a delicate nose. Lowlands are underrated and underappreciated. One can only hope more distilleries find a foothold.

Highlands: The largest region, this region is smokey, fruity, heavier than lowlands, spicy, and varied. Since the region is so large, whiskies can vary from the heathery spice of Northern Highlands to the fruity flavors of Southern Highlands. Some famous distilleries are Oban, Glenmorangie, Dalmore, Dalwwhinnie, among many. They are more full-bodied than Lowlands and carry a more viscous feeling to the liquid on your tongue. This, compounded with the smokiness and spiciness of certain malts makes a Highland a sitting experience (or at least a stopping experience). Not one to drink on the go (nor is any scotch, really).

Speyside: Surrounded by the Highlands, the Speyside region  occupies a specific space within the scotch ethos. Speyside is the center of scotch whisky. Located along the river Spey, more than half of the distilleries in all of Scotland are located in this region. The flavors are strong of smoke, fruit, syrup, and elegance. Famous distilleries include Glenfiddich, Macallan, and Glenlivet. Speyside has a firm body followed by distinct flavors ranging from fruitiness to smokiness, spice with nuts and coffee. The most well-known.

Islay: Named after the island and pronounced "eye-luh", these are tastes of the sea. Salty, seaweed, iodine, smoke, PEAT PEAT PEAT, and warmth, Islay whiskies are the most distinct of any region. My personal favorite, Islay whiskies are NOT for beginners. They can be overwhelming to nostrils and tongues alike, but once conquered offer the most intense flavors (in my opinion). Islay often astound me because they are the same ingredients...but they taste so radically different. Amazing.

Now...for the 5th. Campbeltown was once a booming capital of Scotland for whisky, but has since fallen into near nothingness. As of recent, the distilleries are making a comeback. Whiskies include Glen Scotia, Glengyle, and Springbank. The whiskies from here are a cross between and Islay and the mainland whiskies. There is a definite peatiness and saltiness, but to a much lesser degree. The whiskies tend of be bright and light as opposed to the oilier, heavier Islays.

There are a few other islands where whiskies come from (notably Talisker), but not entire regions.

Now you're thinking, "Which is best?" Impossible to tell. That's like asking if I like to breathe. Ok, terrible simile. But what mood am I in? What's the weather outside? What time is it? Have I eaten? Lowlands are perfect for hot days. Highlands are wonderful paired with a cigar. Speysides are wonderful digestives. Islays are a meal in themselves! Campbeltown can be an aperitif. Is your palate sensitive? Do you like the beach? Do you like fruit? Nuts? Chocolate? The possibilities are endless. Currently I have 2 islays, a lowlands, a Campbeltown, and 2 blends. Next...perhaps a Highlands. I've had my eye on a few different ones. Amongst my friends, I have the affinity for islays (although I'm working on them!). They don't particulary enjoy the harshness that can be associated with many islays. Different strokes for different folks. 

So there you have it. My painless regional variations. What's you mood? 

Next time: a review!